I think he had an overriding agenda: pry the root from the US. This, I think, caused him to be silent about ICANN's faults because to speak about them, or to alientate its allies, was to lessen the odds of achieving what was to him an over-riding goal.

I continue to think this was a horribly mistaken strategy on all fronts: 1. The US was clearly not going to give up the root; 2. ICANN got away with murder in the DNS space; 3. It sets a rotten precedent for global governance efforts.

But I think that unlike many (but not all) of the folks who pursued the strong-ICANN agenda, Amadeu had pure motives. He was in no one's pay, and he arrived at his policy choices in a way that followed reasonably from his priorities. I have time for that. If you don't, well, we disagree.